• The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

Is it now a good time to cut days raced & severity of grand tours?

Feb 23, 2011
618
0
0
Visit site
With all the talk of cleaning up the sport recently would it be a good time to discuss:

1. The severity of some 3 weeks tour routes (vuelta 2012) springs to mind and;
2. The number of days the average pro is racing per season (in recent years the season seems to be jan to November with a 1 month off season for some guys)

Surely if everyone is demanding a clean sport organisers have to consider whether they can justifiably treat riders as performing monkeys in the way they have done in recent years.
 
No. It could be a race to the shop to by a pint of milk and they'd still hit up the syringe.

They'd dope their own grandmothers if they thought it would help them.

They dope to get the result not because the course is hard.
 
Hes right. Shorter races like the 100m 200m, the 50m swim or even the Dubai Marathon, have 0 positive tests ergo are absolutely clean.

If the GTs were just 1 tt up a mountain it would make absolutely no difference if you had 60% hematocrit or had watched the previous 100 riders go up while sitting on a sofa with a beer and a pack of chips.
 
Mar 10, 2009
6,158
1
0
Visit site
B_Ugli said:
With all the talk of cleaning up the sport recently would it be a good time to discuss:

1. The severity of some 3 weeks tour routes (vuelta 2012) springs to mind and;
2. The number of days the average pro is racing per season (in recent years the season seems to be jan to November with a 1 month off season for some guys)

Surely if everyone is demanding a clean sport organisers have to consider whether they can justifiably treat riders as performing monkeys in the way they have done in recent years.

I've tried this topic a few times and no one wants to hear it. The masses still want to see riders go through the most grueling and physically demanding races which need extra additives to complete without dropping out due to exhaustion. Saying its not a factor is equal to those who say "look to the future, not the past of cycling".

Just look at this years Tour, twice up Alpe d'Huez, yea that sounds easy enough why not three times, and in one stage while they're at it. This is where I give a big fail to the ASO, if they were serious they'd tone things down a bit just to prove the point and give the "clean" riders a chance, but no they bend to the masses desires of a herculean Tour.

Nope, lets give it to the next rider who can trump the system with some new undetectable method. :rolleyes:
 
Got nothing to do with dope and still ...

The Vuelta lasted for 17 days until the 80's, I think.


And remember what happened many of the greatest classics and one-day races by 1990.

Distances cut down to 200km.

Ghent-Wevelgem 1989: 276km ; 1990: 204km
Flèche wallonne 1989: 253km; 1990: 208km
Paris-Brussels 1989: 294km; 1990: 246km; 2012: 216.8km
Francfurt GP 1989: 252km; 1990: 210km
Het Volk 1989: 244km; 1990: 201km

and all the Italian semis whose distance I don't have here, but they suffered the same stroke. thanks Verbrugghen !


So if you wish to keep the 3 week duration for GT, I demand that these great races have their proper distance back ! :mad:
 
The 2012 Vuelta is actually one of the easier GT routes I've seen recently. Short stages, very few stages with more than one climb...

Making the races easier will not make doping less common. The people who are already doping would continue to dope, and if everybody else wasn't doping they'd have it easier because they'd be fresher. People don't dope for the difficulty of the race. They dope to win, or to keep their job, or to get a new job, or because it's what everybody on their team does.
 
ElChingon said:
I've tried this topic a few times and no one wants to hear it. The masses still want to see riders go through the most grueling and physically demanding races which need extra additives to complete without dropping out due to exhaustion. Saying its not a factor is equal to those who say "look to the future, not the past of cycling".

Just look at this years Tour, twice up Alpe d'Huez, yea that sounds easy enough why not three times, and in one stage while they're at it. This is where I give a big fail to the ASO, if they were serious they'd tone things down a bit just to prove the point and give the "clean" riders a chance, but no they bend to the masses desires of a herculean Tour.

Nope, lets give it to the next rider who can trump the system with some new undetectable method. :rolleyes:
So doping is not an advantage if the stage is, let's say, 30 kms long?
So no clean athlete can finish, at his own pace, a 250 kms long stage over 4 HCs?

This kind of reasoning has already ruined this sport enough.
 
rest

was the 2nd rest day in grand tours introduced because of such an issue?

are modern grand tours already shorter than the 1960's?

i see no need to lighten the load anymore

however teams will not be happy with aso's idea of limiting teams to 8 riders
in the tdf increasing the burden of support riders
 
Sep 29, 2012
12,197
0
0
dearwiggo.blogspot.com.au
B_Ugli said:
With all the talk of cleaning up the sport recently would it be a good time to discuss:

1. The severity of some 3 weeks tour routes (vuelta 2012) springs to mind and;
2. The number of days the average pro is racing per season (in recent years the season seems to be jan to November with a 1 month off season for some guys)

Surely if everyone is demanding a clean sport organisers have to consider whether they can justifiably treat riders as performing monkeys in the way they have done in recent years.

yes. shoot me a pm if you wish to discuss further and the forum is getting you down.
 
Mrs John Murphy said:
No. It could be a race to the shop to by a pint of milk and they'd still hit up the syringe.

They'd dope their own grandmothers if they thought it would help them.

They dope to get the result not because the course is hard.
It is.

Nobody dope to can climb the mountain. They dope to climb the mountain fastest.
 
Mar 10, 2009
6,158
1
0
Visit site
Eshnar said:
So doping is not an advantage if the stage is, let's say, 30 kms long?
So no clean athlete can finish, at his own pace, a 250 kms long stage over 4 HCs?

This kind of reasoning has already ruined this sport enough.

Don't look back, look the the future :rolleyes:
 
Feb 23, 2011
618
0
0
Visit site
Time and time again riders are stating that they have doped more for recovery and to keep up after two weeks. A third week riddled with 20% climbs will always make temptation to dope worse. A middle of the pack rider in the Vuelta having raced since January, trying to stave off exhaustion is going to dope to finish the race.

Especially if that guy doesn't have a contract for next year - that is the reality for most of your average pros.
 
Oct 11, 2010
777
0
0
Visit site
The courses are already much less severe than they used to be. Hardly any stages over 250km anymore, which is lame.

I agree that the season is too long though. Who the hell cares about races in January? TDU is the worst race on the calendar.
 
ElChingon said:
Just look at this years Tour, twice up Alpe d'Huez, yea that sounds easy enough why not three times, and in one stage while they're at it. This is where I give a big fail to the ASO, if they were serious they'd tone things down a bit just to prove the point and give the "clean" riders a chance, but no they bend to the masses desires of a herculean Tour.

That stage has little more than twice up the Alpe. There have been much harder stages this year alone.

The hard stages aren't what cause people to dope. The will to win amongst the frontrunners causes them to dope, and that causes those behind to need to do it to stay in the time limits. The parcours aren't what causes people to dope. People dope in 100m running, for god's sake. They've made racing easier, and the doping has continued, even got worse since then.

Also, a lot of riders who get caught doping will throw in the recovery thing as a reason as it's good for PR - compared to "I'm an evil so-and-so who just wanted to win at any cost", it engenders more sympathy to say it was something they did to survive the gruelling pain of the race. Steve Houanard was doping to try to get a job because he was desperate near the end of the season. Races being easier would not have changed that - he would still have been being outperformed by other guys, just over a shorter distance. His reason for doping was nothing to do with the routes he was being asked to race on, but the people he was being asked to race against.

Now, maybe the Pro teams should have more riders, or the number of ProTour events should be reduced, to weaken the strain of the number of racing days, but the actual races themselves should still seek to be proper challenges, not watered down 100km one-hill races.
 
Mar 10, 2009
6,158
1
0
Visit site
So you guys (that don't want more rest days/shorter stages/less HC climbs) think that adding an extra day of racing in a GT or adding an extra HC climb in a GT will reduce doping?

The facts are if you race a GT stage with three Cat 1 climbs you would be better served to rest up to do it again, but instead you say no let them ride another day of +200K with a ride up Alpe d'Huez or some other mythic climb? Keep just two rest days don't add another. Maybe you guys would want to go back to the two stages in one day days?

You must of never ridden to know what it takes to ride day after day and bread and water will only take you so far. When's the last time you had a long day at work and then went home and just had bread and water, or didn't down a huge cup of coffee the next morning to go at it again? Yea, NEVER! How many of you regular coffee drinkers ever gone a week or month without it? Yea, you can't because you're weak just like the dopers who are now pushing this "they were all doing it" or "I was peer pressured to do it" BS. Total BS.
 
Mar 10, 2009
6,158
1
0
Visit site
B_Ugli said:
Time and time again riders are stating that they have doped more for recovery and to keep up after two weeks. A third week riddled with 20% climbs will always make temptation to dope worse. A middle of the pack rider in the Vuelta having raced since January, trying to stave off exhaustion is going to dope to finish the race.

Especially if that guy doesn't have a contract for next year - that is the reality for most of your average pros.

Yes, its been in existence since it started but the masses want the drama and the agony of ... doping?

Its all there if you've read about the history of bicycle racing but I guess everyone else skipped those segments :rolleyes:

Heck if you've been on this freaking forum for any decent length of time and actually read some you'd of seen it by now!

My proof, is this "Clinc" section of the forum! SERENITY NOW!!!!
 
ElChingon said:
Just look at this years Tour, twice up Alpe d'Huez, yea that sounds easy enough why not three times, and in one stage while they're at it.
Been there? Easiest friggin' climb of all the Alps. And boring. View doesn't change. It's like an elevator, but slower.
Great vertical meters for the effort though. Corners are like helicopter platforms, a welcome change of pace.
People who were never into cycling go there, and ride it 6 times in one days, to collect some money for cancer. People just cured of cancer, go there to ride it up 6 times in a days to celebrate life.

Let's just give riders less privacy. Like in real bike races, let them all sleep in a sports complex. And yes, let the anti-doping press in there. No hotels, no busses. You have a bike to get to place, and a roof over your head at the stops. Need to be pampered even more, bikeboy?
 
ElChingon said:
So you guys (that don't want more rest days/shorter stages/less HC climbs) think that adding an extra day of racing in a GT or adding an extra HC climb in a GT will reduce doping?
no, it would change nothing, one way or the other.
ElChingon said:
The facts are if you race a GT stage with three Cat 1 climbs you would be better served to rest up to do it again, but instead you say no let them ride another day of +200K with a ride up Alpe d'Huez or some other mythic climb? Keep just two rest days don't add another. Maybe you guys would want to go back to the two stages in one day days?

You must of never ridden to know what it takes to ride day after day and bread and water will only take you so far. When's the last time you had a long day at work and then went home and just had bread and water, or didn't down a huge cup of coffee the next morning to go at it again? Yea, NEVER! How many of you regular coffee drinkers ever gone a week or month without it? Yea, you can't because you're weak just like the dopers who are now pushing this "they were all doing it" or "I was peer pressured to do it" BS. Total BS.
Any cycling amateur can ride any GT route at his own pace. You must have never ridden, sorry.
 
The point of an endurance sport is to be hard, difficult on recovery and test, you know what? Endurance.

Making the races shorter, or easier, takes away one of the key aspects on which the sport is based - endurance. The point of a Grand Tour is that it lasts 3 weeks. That's what it does, and if it lasts two weeks, then it's no longer a Grand Tour really. And if you've shown it to not be sacrosanct, then clearly it's not above shortening again or again, and then you're left with the Volta a Portugal at a higher level. Grand Tours are higher valued on the palmarès than shorter events for the same reason the marathon is more prestigious than the half-marathon: they are the blue riband events for endurance. To shorten or to make the Grand Tours deliberately easy is to reduce the marathon to 30km, to have the Le Mans 18 hours - totally pointless, and a half-baked gesture in an event that will still be all about endurance and still have the same problems with doping because, guess what? Racing for two weeks, driving for 18 hours, running for 30km... it's still really hard!
 
yes and no answer really,

yes hard GT's can push riders to push limits of what is legal. but still thnk they would do that near as much on easier course, however they do need to look at it, seems rest days are pointless and be better served by a short flat stage that day.

Also note phinneys comments on lads causing crashes cause their hopped up on pain killers.